The idle musings of a former military man, former computer geek, medically retired pastor and now full-time writer. Contents guaranteed to offend the politically correct and anal-retentive from time to time. My approach to life is that it should be taken with a large helping of laughter, and sufficient firepower to keep it tamed!
Some of the fastest web-offset presses, in which an inked image is transferred to another roller and thence to the surface being printed, can churn out more than 20 newspapers a second. Flexographic presses, which use a flexible relief image on a cylinder to print things such as packaging, can belt along at 500 metres a minute. These methods have already been adapted to print basic electronic circuits, by replacing conventional graphic inks with conductive inks that can carry an electric current. Scientists and engineers, however, have loftier ambitions than these. They are developing ways to print not just circuits but also sophisticated electronic devices, such as thin-film transistors, using the mass-production capabilities of roll-to-roll processes.
. . .
Printing electronics requires special formulations of ink. Often, these are made with silver, which is a better conductor even than copper. But silver is expensive. An alternative, being worked on by Tawfique Hasan and his research group at Cambridge University, is to include flakes of graphene in such inks. Graphene is a form of carbon made from sheets a single atom thick. The result, Dr Hasan claims, can be manufactured and printed for a fraction of the cost of silver ink and is conductive enough for many applications, such as disposable biosensors used to test samples from patients, and packaging that can track and authenticate a product. Graphene ink could also be used to make electrodes for printed batteries.
Dr Hasan and his colleagues have demonstrated flexographic printing of conductive graphene ink at more than 100 metres a minute. They are working in collaboration with Novalia, a firm in Cambridge that has produced several printed touch-sensitive products, including a musical keyboard and interactive posters. They have also established a company called Inkling Cambridge to commercialise the formulation and develop other electronic inks, coatings and paints.
One idea they are exploring is “smart” wallpaper. In addition to graphene ink, this would use either organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) or quantum dots—crystals of semiconducting material just a few atoms across. Both of these emit light when excited by electricity, so wall coverings printed with such materials could be used to illuminate rooms.
. . .
Another use for printed electronics of this sort is solar energy. Several groups are working on making thin-film solar panels in this way. Such panels, being cheap and lightweight, could readily be attached to walls and roofs, and even built into roofing tiles.
Sounds very interesting - just as long as purchasers don't use old printed electronics to line the catbox or the bird cage! I can foresee some interesting short-circuits . . .
A man has been caught attempting to smuggle his pet turtle through airport security by disguising it as a KFC burger.
The man, who has been identified only by his surname, Li, was at China’s Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport ahead of a China Southern Airlines flight to Beijing when staff spotted on the X-ray scanner some “odd protrusions” from a fast food wrapper, according to China’s Guangzhou Daily newspaper.
Li, motivated by a desire not to be separated from his pet, he told officials, had hidden the turtle in a sesame seed buns and packaged it in KFC paper.
“There’s no turtle in there, just a hamburger,” Li reportedly told airport staff, according to the newspaper, after initially refusing a bag search. “There’s nothing special to see inside,” he added.
The turtle was eventually freed and Li was told the animal was not allowed on the plane. He agreed to leave his “beloved” turtle with a friend so that he could still make the flight.
It looks like the hoverboard featured in the 'Back To The Future' movie series is slowly but surely turning out to be prophetic.
Zapata Racing in France has developed the 'Flyboard Air'. It's claimed to be able to remain in the air for up to 10 minutes in its present form, and to have the potential to reach an altitude of up to 10,000 feet and a top speed of over 90 mph. The inventor set a new world record with a prototype earlier this year, covering the best part of 1½ miles.
Now comes the news that a US company has bought Zapata Racing, with a view to developing an entirely new range of products based on their technology.
Implant Sciences Corporation, of Wilmington, Mass., which makes Explosives Trace Detection (ETD) solutions for the Department of Homeland Security ... signed a letter of intent at the end of July to acquire Zapata Industries...
. . .
The company sees the Flyboard Air as “a real, scalable solution that could really provide what people candidly had only seen in movies and looked at from a science-fiction perspective,” Liscouski said. “It’s a real technology.”
Liscouski acknowledged that not every technology turns out to be a good business idea. “I’m not going to try to overplay or overblow expectations here, we are taking a very rational and business-like approach toward this,” he said. “But you can’t help get excited when you see it. You want one. I want one.”
The company has taken the proof-of-concept Flyboard to various interested communities “particularly with the [Defense Department] and the special operators' community” to find out if they believe there is a practical application for it. “The feedback that we are getting is ‘Yes',” he said. “So that further validated our thinking going down this path.”
The hope is, Liscouski said, to bring the technology into the company and build the company around it. “We think there is a variety of military and other civilian applications, and we think there is a whole, wide-open commercial application to it.”
The hoverboard invented by Zapata Industries' owner Franky Zapata is powered by four jet engines. The controlling mechanism “is sort of where the secret sauce is,” Liscouski said. “Zapata has created their own algorithms to ensure they’ve got the right balance control and redundancies to safeguard an engine failure.”
. . .
Only about 20 hours of training is required to teach someone to fly on the hoverboard.
Liscouski envisions immediate military applications such as classic troop movement — infiltration and exfiltration — but the platform could be scaled beyond just a platform that can accommodate a person standing on it.
“We are looking to scale the platform for supply — logistical supply — and medical evacuation,” Liscouski said.
Zapata has produced this video, showing various potential military applications of its technology. It's quite impressive.
If this technology can be developed as the video suggests, it's going to be very interesting . . . and probably also very expensive! Robert Heinlein's 'Starship Troopers' will be one step closer to reality.
An Australian kayaker felt the need for speed in a whole new way last week.
A man who was left stranded on a Queensland island after a crocodile attacked his kayak told rescuers he had never paddled so fast in his life when the beast sank its teeth into his small vessel.
The man, who is yet to be identified, was rescued on Saturday morning, four days after he had set off from Yeppoon on a journey to Stanage Bay, which is about 200km north of the central Queensland town.
His kayak was attacked about 3km off Townshend Island in the Shoalwater Bay area, about 111km north of Rockhampton.
"It's croc country out there," an Australian Maritime Safety Authority spokeswoman.
I remember that album very well indeed . . . I used to sing songs from it to myself as I cycled to school and back. Many of its songs were later used in the soundtrack to the film 'McCabe and Mrs. Miller'.
A lot of people today, who came to Leonard Cohen's music later than us old farts, don't realize that the song was about a real person. Marianne Ihlen and Leonard Cohen had a ten-year relationship, and remained on good terms all their lives.
Sadly, she contracted leukemia recently. The Telegraph reports:
Her close friend Jan Christian Mollestad told Canada's CBC radio that he had contacted Cohen, 81, to tell him Ihlen was dying of leukaemia and had only a few days to live.
He recalled: "It took only two hours and in came this beautiful letter from Leonard to Marianne.
"We brought this letter in to her the next day and she was fully conscious and she was so happy that he had already written something for her."
Mollestad, a documentary filmmaker, read the letter to Ihlen before she died.
He recalled: "It said, 'Well Marianne, it's come to this time when we are really so old and our bodies are falling apart and I think I will follow you very soon. Know that I am so close behind you that if you stretch out your hand, I think you can reach mine.
"And you know that I've always loved you for your beauty and for your wisdom, but I don't need to say anything more about that because you know all about that. But now, I just want to wish you a very good journey."
Mollestad told host Rosemary Barton that when he read the line "stretch out your hand", Ihlen had stretched out her hand.
"It was a very nice gesture from both of them," he said.
"Only two days after, she lost consciousness and slipped into death. And when she died, I wrote a letter back to him saying in her final moments I hummed A Bird on the Wire because that was the song she felt closest to.
"And then I kissed her on the head and left the room, and said 'So long, Marianne'."
Reflecting on Cohen and Ihlen's relationship over the years, Mollestad recalled: "What Marianne said, was Leonard was the one who loved her for herself, who opened her up and let her feel that she was worth loving, not only because she was beautiful outside, but he really was interested in her."
That was a lovely and very tender farewell. I'm not ashamed to admit I had a tear in my eye reading that. Yes, I'm a sentimental old so-and-so. What of it?
In Marianne's memory, here's her favorite song.
Rest in peace, Marianne. Thanks for your inspiration, that brought us Leonard's song. It's meant a lot to me down the years.
It seems that less than half the country believes this woman should grow up, accept responsibility for her own life and her own mistakes, and work to correct them. The remainder - sadly, seemingly more than half - seem to believe that it's Big Brother's job to take care of them (at taxpayer expense, of course).
A tip o' the hat to reader Mike T. for sending me the link to this story.
Friday evening, a man reportedly came home to find people inside his townhouse on Garden District Drive, in the middle of a burglary. He was able to back out of his home, without them noticing he was there, and call 911, according to officers.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg police arrived while the two were still in the house and arrested them.
Without knowing that police were still inside the townhouse investigating the break-in, three more people returned to try to break into the home about two hours later. Officers said the three tried to run away, but were quickly apprehended.
How, precisely, can one not be aware that there are people in a house - even if you don't know they're cops? Lights would be on, voices would doubtless be heard, there would be vehicles outside (possibly including a marked police unit, in this instance), and so on. Just how deaf, dumb and blind (or stoned) do you have to be not to notice those things?
I'm in the process of updating our financial records. In the process, I'm getting very fed up with various flavors of accounting software. Most of the supposedly 'secure' online financial record-keeping software has proved, under rigorous testing, to be penetrable by hackers; so I've decided to keep all our data locally rather than in the 'cloud'. However, most of the software available today insists on working online, and is very reluctant to let you do things only locally. As a result, I've gone back to an old edition of Microsoft Money (which I used for many years, but it's long out of production). To my pleasure, I find it's still more than adequate for my needs, even while simultaneously managing over a dozen different bank and other accounts. (You can download a free, unsupported version of Money from Microsoft at this link, if you're interested. Try it. You might be surprised at how useful it is.)
I've noticed that there's a hidden danger in using heavily automated online services. They'll link to all your bank accounts automatically, download the latest transactions, and update your records accordingly - all very convenient, to be sure. However, because you aren't scrutinizing every single transaction, it's too easy for you to simply skim over them, confirm that your records agree with your bank statements, and then leave matters as they stand. You don't pay attention to detail, because you never have to!
By entering each transaction manually, as the older version of Money forces me to do, I find I'm forced to concentrate harder. It becomes second nature to check each transaction against a statement and/or a checkbook and/or my bank's Web site (often more than one of them), so that I never skim over anything. If something seems out of place, it's immediately visible - it doesn't linger, hidden in the background, to catch me unawares in the future. Already I've found five or six transactions that I couldn't identify to my satisfaction; so I've dug out old checkbooks, and checked records online, and dug deeper until I could reconcile each one. (Two are going to the bank for further investigation.)
Doing it this way is time-consuming, inconvenient, and sometimes frustrating . . . but it's also making me a whole lot more aware of our financial 'big picture'. Despite the drawbacks, there's a lot to be said for doing the nitty-gritty detail work yourself, instead of trusting automated services to do it all for you. I suspect Dave Ramsey would approve.
Just my $0.02 worth. YMMV, and all that sort of thing.
A Homer [Alaska] man shot and killed a charging sow brown bear at Humpy Creek last Friday. Kim Woodman, 57, shot the bear five times with a 10mm handgun before the bear fell about 6 feet from him. While backing away from the sow, Woodman fell and accidentally shot himself in the left foot.
Woodman was able to get to his skiff and return to Homer, where he checked into the South Peninsula Hospital emergency room. Woodman had no injuries from the bear, said Jack Blackwell, area superintendent of Alaska State Parks, Kenai-Prince William Sound region.
Blackwell said Woodman surprised a brown bear with two cubs while hiking about 4 p.m. July 29 off the trail along the southwest fork of Humpy Creek in Kachemak Bay State Park. The bears were probably feeding on pink salmon in the creek. Woodman filled out a defense of life and property report, and Park Ranger Jason Okuly and Alaska Department of Fish and Game biologist Jason Herreman went to the scene and found the dead sow bear. They reported the sow had two gunshot wounds, one below the right eye and one in the chest.
They recovered the skull and paws to prevent trophy looting. The carcass was about 6 feet from where Woodman tripped.
Six feet? That's halitosis range as far as big bears are concerned! I'm not surprised he shot himself in the foot when he fell - he was probably still trying to get a bead on the bear, and didn't notice that his foot was suddenly in the way. The heat of the moment will do that to you . . . Also, according to the article, this wasn't Mr. Woodman's first deadly encounter with a brown bear. I suspect he was trying to make absolutely sure that he survived this one, too!
[Sir Tim] Berners-Lee wanted the World Wide Web to be a place where people could share information across the world through documents and links navigated with a simple search function.
The first step to making that a reality occurred on August 6, 1991, and was hailed with little fanfare when Berners-Lee launched the first web page [shown below - click to enlarge] from his NeXT computer at CERN's headquarters in Geneva.
Housed at http://info.cern.ch, the founding website contained basic instructions for how the web worked, including how to access documents and set up your own server. CERN reinstated the page at its original address in 2013.
Another date rivals today as the actual birthday of the World Wide Web: March 12, 1989, the day Berners-Lee published his proposal for what he then called “Information Management”.
Primarily a business proposal, Berners-Lee conceived of the web as a way to prevent information loss in businesses and the scientific community.
At the time, he was working as a computer programmer at CERN's European Organisation for Nuclear Research, where he'd seen countless amounts of data lost because of high staff turnover and poor communication. And he'd looked on as researchers wasted weeks solving problems only to find out it had been tackled years earlier.
. . .
Within a year and a half, just before Christmas in 1990, Berners-Lee had built the infrastructure for the web and designed the first web page. He wrote the HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP), which outlined how information would travel between computers, and HyperText Markup Language (HTML), which was used to create the first web pages.
He also wrote the text for the first website that described the project and how others could get involved.
The site went live on August 6, 1991, and was housed on Berners-Lees' NeXT computer, the first server, which had a note taped to the front that said: "This machine is a server. DO NOT POWER DOWN".
I remember reading about that in technical journals in 1991 and 1992, while working in South Africa. It seemed like just another development in the computer industry, one that sounded vaguely interesting, but certainly nothing world-shattering. I'd been online already for several years, but was largely limited to the South African Post Office's implementation of the Videotex system, known locally as Beltel.
A Videotex screen. Each line was 40 characters across.
Introduced in the late 1980's, Beltel operated at the dazzling speed of 1,200 baud over dial-up modems. During periods of high traffic, usually in the early evenings, speed might be cut to half that or less. I can remember one screen of banking information (and oh, the revolution it was to be able to access my bank statement from home whenever I pleased!) taking over five minutes to download . . . and that seemed tolerable at the time. Now, I'd be disgusted if it took five seconds!
Twenty-five years on from that first Web site, the Web has become indispensable. Without it, modern commerce and industry simply could not function. Today the so-called 'Internet of things' and 'cloud computing' (both impossible without the Web) are the buzzwords du jour. What will the Web be like twenty-five years from now? I don't know whether I'll be around to find out, but it should be interesting . . .
So far we've seen videos from John Neeman Tools covering making a longbow and a Damascus steel knife. Here's how they make a traditional axe. Watch it in full-screen mode for best results.
Their list of axes for sale is mouth-watering stuff. I might just have to save up for one of their double bladed axes, or perhaps their Viking battle axe. Talk about inspiration for a writer! It might be worth the wait (they're taking reservations only for axes right now, because their backlog is so big).
. . . if they can afford it! The Normandy Tank Museum in France is auctioning off its collection of Second World War vehicles, including everything from tanks to aircraft, bulldozers to LVT's, trucks to motorcycles. It's a fascinating collection, particularly in the less common pieces. For example, there are the well-known liaison motorcycles such as this 1943 Harley-Davidson WLA:
Then there's this much less well-known paratrooper liaison motorcycle (more like a 'liaison scooter', I guess) - the Cushman Motors M53-A, known as the 'Cushman Airborne'. Several thousand were 'dropped in action' with US paratroopers in Europe.
There are several tanks for sale, but I was particularly interested in this 1944 M7 Priest self-propelled 105mm. howitzer.
The reason I find it so interesting is that I saw in Africa the Canadian-built version of this gun, the Sexton, fitted with the British 25-pounder artillery piece. (Yes, a World War II self-propelled gun really was in service up to forty years later!)
Finally, to deal with not just low-flying enemy aircraft, but also infantry on the ground, the M45 Quadmount with its four .50-caliber machine-guns was guaranteed to put a hurt on the enemy. It was nicknamed the 'Krautmower' or the 'meat-chopper' for its impressive (and gory) performance in the latter role.
Put that at the head of your driveway, and you'll never be bothered by 'borrowing neighbors' again!
There are all sorts of other vehicles up for auction; tanks, a Piper Cub liaison aircraft, even an LVT (landing vehicle, tracked) as used by the Marines in the Pacific (and by the US Army in river crossings and beach landings in Europe, too). Most are in excellent condition, having been superbly restored. For artillery buffs, there's even a genuine German Flak 88, complete with wheeled mount.
You'll find the auction listing here, and its online catalog here (complete with photographs to make any military history fan drool). If you plan to attend the auction in France, I suggest you take lots and lots and lots of money . . .
In a very funny article in Taki's Magazine, Joe Bob Briggs lays it out for so-called 'journalists'.
What is it about Donald Trump that makes journalists go insane?
. . .
Of all the words used by the press to describe Donald Trump, the million-hit wonders are these:
bully 1.4 million self-obsessed 2.5 million vicious 9.1 million rude 13.3 million cruel 13.3 million liar 16.2 million angry 19.3 million And the winner—drum roll, please:
idiot 20.5 million
Notice that five of the eight are internal attributes, only one can be fact-checked, and the most popular epithet of them all is the last refuge of sputtering incoherent rage. It’s reminiscent of the old Saturday Night Live routine, with Dan Aykroyd responding to anything Jane Curtin said with, “Jane, you ignorant slut.”
Ladies and gentlemen, most unjournalistic.
. . .
But it doesn’t stop there. Another abandonment of traditional journalistic responsibility—Dr. Naugahyde is turning over in his grave—connotes massive ignorance on the part of the Fourth Estate, and they’re not even ashamed of it. It takes the form of the “Who the Heck Is Voting for Trump?” article. This is apparently a perplexing conundrum to the national press corps, especially the branch that dines at the Yale Club.
First of all, you’re not supposed to be asking who votes for Trump, you’re supposed to be telling us. I realize this might require moving outside the realm of people who wear 18th-century crests on their Princeton crew jackets, but it’s kind of why you’ve been given the job in the first place.
Unfortunately, the identity of the Trump voter is such an overwhelming mystery to so many that several publications, including the Atlantic Monthly, have actually hired psychologists to figure it out. Maria Konnikova, writing in the Internet forum Big Think, looked up Trump in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and went with the Eastern Long Island crowd favorite: Narcissistic Personality Disorder. A long piece in Esquire, speculating on said narcissism, was headlined “Donald Trump Doesn’t Need Our Attention, He Needs Our Pity”—but most of the armchair shrinks declined to participate in the group hug.
I won’t even go into the hundreds of “unfit to be President” screeds, because they all ignore one basic fact of our system: If you receive 270 votes in the electoral college, you are by definition fit to be President. Democracy’s a bitch, dudes.
There's more at the link. Worth reading - and it's great fun, besides.
Objectivity of the press? Responsible journalism? Don't make me laugh . . .
If you ever thought you could prevent people from getting their hands on a gun by making purchases more difficult (or banning them entirely), think again. Here's how you can make a 12 gauge shotgun out of common plumber's pipe, for a total expenditure of just seven dollars. I've chosen to skip the introductory material and start the video at the actual build point. If you'd like to see the whole thing, click here to view it on YouTube.
A couple of weeks ago I put up twoarticles about inflation: its real rate, and what this has meant for our purchasing power, and what it will continue to mean in future. Now Charles Hugh Smith, whom we've met many times before in these pages, is publishing a series of articles in similar vein - and his conclusions are equally sobering for our future.
In our household, we measure inflation with the Burrito Index: How much has the cost of a regular burrito at our favorite taco truck gone up?
Since we keep detailed records of expenses (a necessity if you’re a self-employed free-lance writer), I can track the real-world inflation of the Burrito Index with great accuracy: the cost of a regular burrito from our local taco truck has gone up from $2.50 in 2001 to $5 in 2010 to $6.50 in 2016.
That’s a $160% increase since 2001; 15 years in which the official inflation rate reports that what $1 bought in 2001 can supposedly be bought with $1.35 today.
If the Burrito Index had tracked official inflation, the burrito at our truck should cost $3.38—up only 35% from 2001. Compare that to today's actual cost of $6.50—almost double what it “should cost” according to official inflation calculations.
. . .
My Burrito Index is a rough-and-ready index of real-world inflation. To insure its measure isn’t an outlying aberration, we also need to track the real-world costs of big-ticket items such as college tuition and healthcare insurance, as well as local government-provided services. When we do, we observe results of similar magnitude.
The takeaway? Our money is losing its purchasing power much faster than the government would like us to believe.
In the second article, 'Inflation Hidden in Plain Sight', Mr. Smith reminds us that much inflation isn't shown only in prices - it appears in smaller quantities and lower quality, all charged at the same price as before.
Can we be honest and say that many of the reductions in value, quantity and quality are actually instances of fraud?
. . .
... price inflation doesn't necessarily reflect all the inflation that's hidden in plain sight in smaller quantities and declining quality. We've all observed prices of consumer items remaining the same while the amount of the product we receive for our money is less than it was a few years ago.
While a reduction in product quantities can be easily calculated, reductions in quality are harder to discern and calculate.
Consider the quantity and quality of the paint being applied to kitchen appliances. Although I can't quantify this, I've noticed appliances such as ranges and refrigerators are now prone to rust along the bottom edges in a few years because the manufacturers no longer apply much paint to surfaces and edges that are not visible, for example the underside of the steel exteriors.
This sort of rust was unknown in older appliances, or would only be visible after decades of service, not a few years.
I also notice that the paint is now so thin that scrubbing will in some cases remove the top layer of paint.
These reductions in quality may be the result of corporate cost-cutting or planned obsolescence or both. The net result is a form of inflation/loss of purchasing power as the price does not reflect smaller quantities and reduced quality/ service life.
What would happen if the real rate of inflation was revealed? The entire status quo would immediately implode.
. . .
Here are a few of the consequences:
1. Social Security beneficiaries would demand annual increases of 7+% instead of zero or near-zero annual increases. The Social Security system, which is already distributing more benefit payments that it is receiving in payroll tax revenues, would immediately go deep in the red.
2. Global investors might start demanding yields on Treasury bonds that are above the real rate of inflation. If inflation is running at 7%, then bond buyers would need to earn 8% per year just to earn a real return of 1% ... Bond yields of 8+% would collapse the status quo of massive government deficit spending.
3. Private-sector interest rates would also rise, crushing private borrowing. How many autos, trucks and homes would sell if buyers had to pay 8% interest on new loans? A lot less than are being sold at 1% interest auto loans or 3.5% mortgages.
4. Any serious decline in private and state borrowing would implode the entire system. Recall that a very modest drop in new borrowing very nearly collapsed the global financial system in 2008-09, as the whole system depends on a permanently monstrous expansion of new borrowing to fund consumption, student loans, taxes, etc.
. . .
Who's being destroyed by 7+% real inflation? Everyone whose income has stagnated and everyone who depends on wages rather than assets to get by--in other words, the bottom 95%.
The collapse of asset inflation will implode all the fiscal and financial promises based on ever-inflating assets.
. . .
Destroying the return on cash with ZIRP and NIRP (negative interest rate policy) has forced capital to chase any asset that offers any hope of a positive yield. As asset inflation takes off, the capital gains attract more capital (never mind if yields are low--we'll make a killing from capital gains as the asset inflates further) which creates a self-reinforcing feedback: the more assets inflate, the more attractive they become to capital seeking any kind of return.
In effect, gambling on additional future asset inflation is the only game in town.
. . .
With the cost of borrowing less than zero once the loss of purchasing power (i.e. consumer price inflation) is factored in, it makes sense to borrow money to increase speculative asset purchases to leverage up any gains from future asset inflation.
The question that few ask is: what happens to pension funds that need 7.5% annual returns to remain quasi-solvent when asset inflation turns into asset deflation, i.e. assets decline in value?
There are only two ways to keep asset inflation alive: one is for central banks and states to buy up major chunks of all asset classes, i.e. hitting every higher bid regardless of the risks of such a strategy, and the second is to pay households to borrow money to chase future asset inflation, for example, paying households to buy a house with a mortgage:
The insanity of these two strategies is no hindrance to their implementation. The collapse of asset inflation will implode all the fiscal and financial promises based on ever-inflating assets and reveal the unsustainability of the status quo's strategy of substituting debt and asset bubbles for stagnating real income.
I'm looking forward (with trepidation) to Mr. Smith's last article in the series tomorrow. It promises to make unsettling reading - but I can't argue with any of his conclusions. They're merely an expanded, more in-depth version of what I said a couple of weeks ago.
If you'd like to understand the financial, fiscal and economic nuts and bolts of where we are today and how we got there, I'd like to recommend two books. The first is Mr. Smith's new offering, 'Why Our Status Quo Failed and Is Beyond Reform'.
It's a short book and easy reading, free to Kindle Unlimited subscribers, and value-priced for those that aren't. I think it's very useful reading to understand why our present economic system is headed for a terminal fall, whether we like it or not.
Miss D. and I are among those helpingassistingencouraging bullying him onward, and we've already seen some of the draft manuscript. Looks like a lot of fun.
Friend and fellow author Alma Boykin brought back lots of memories (and lots of smiles) with her blog post this morning.
You Might Attend a Rural or Western Place of Worship if:
2/3 of the deacons and the assistant minister are gone because someone’s fence went down and the cows got out.
several deacons and over half the soprano section “carry.”
the opening weekend of deer season is 1) Ladies Auxiliary Sunday and 2) a capella because the senior minister, associate, choir director, and organist have joined over half the choir and a large swath of the congregation out hunting.
the gents at the coffee pot are discussing whether Peter and James would have done better as fishermen had they used trolling motors instead of sails.
Her list reminded me of my first church in this country, in the north central part of Louisiana. I arrived there on the first Sunday in October to preach my first sermon, only to find most of the men wearing camouflage clothing, carrying shotguns on racks in their pickup trucks. For a moment I was worried that their precautions might be in case I preached a bad sermon; but I was swiftly reassured that no, this was the opening weekend of squirrel season, and that after service they'd all be hot on the trail of furry varmints.
Mirth ensued over several more hunting seasons. I instituted a Sunday evening service for the benefit of hunters whom I otherwise wouldn't have seen at church at all for two or three months during the various hunting seasons. Not many came, but at least they had the option - and now and then I benefited to the tune of a haunch of venison, or something like that. (The very dead snapping turtle solemnly presented to me by a triumphant six-year-old didn't make it into my stewpot, I'm sorry to say!)
Then there was the time that over-enthusiastic hunters in the woods behind my rectory fired without thinking about where their bullet might end up. They hit my rectory; so, I stepped out of the back door and shot back into the woods with a .30-30 (aiming carefully at a tree trunk, of course). The sheriff was a mite upset about that.
"Dammit, pastor, you cain't do that!"
"Why not? They shot at me first! Look - there's the bullet hole!"
"I - but - I mean - aww, hell!"
They never did shoot at my rectory again, though . . .
I had to laugh at this Brazilian seriema playing with a golf ball.
At first I wondered whether it thought the ball might be food, and was trying to break it open on the concrete path; but I'm forced to conclude it was simply having fun.
I'm sure we've all heard the expression I used to title this blog post. It's also the key to the tactics opponents of Donald Trump appear to be using to try to derail his Presidential candidacy. I emphasize once again that I'm not a Trump partisan. I don't know enough about him to be for or against him at this point in the election campaign. Nevertheless, the blatant, over-the-top onslaught against him is so mind-boggling in its all-or-nothing desperation that one simply can't ignore it.
Consider the following headlines from the past 24 hours alone (a very small selection from those out there):
The one thing that jumps out at any objective observer is that all these sources, and countless others besides, are 'piling on'. All their sources, and all the journalists and media involved, are parroting from the same playbook. "Donald Trump is a menace. He's unpredictable. He's out of control. He's got to be stopped before he destroys everything worthwhile in our society. You dare not vote for someone so out of touch with reality."
I remind you of an age-old military saying. "Once is an accident. Twice may be coincidence. Three times or more is enemy action." This overwhelming tide of vitriol, abuse and hysteria can only be the latter. There's no other logical, rational explanation.
This leads me to a further question. If Donald Trump were as black as he's being painted, surely there would be no need to worry about him? Surely, if (as French president Francois Hollande pontificates) he 'makes you want to retch', the electorate would be too busy retching to vote for him? Surely, if he's highlighting divisions within his own party, he'll alienate the votes of so large a proportion of that party (not to mention those who aren't Republicans) that he has no chance of winning? (I note that, in refusing to endorse Paul Ryan for re-election, he used precisely the same phrase about Mr. Ryan that the latter used when refusing to endorse Mr. Trump! "Sauce for the goose" and all that . . . ) Surely, if Mr. Trump is 'unfit' and 'woefully unprepared' for the Presidency, as President Obama has said, he'll have no chance of doing any better than Mr. Obama himself? (I remind you that our current President achieved almost nothing before his election except a single term as Senator from Illinois, and has no business or other achievements of any importance in the real world outside politics of which to boast. That being the case, if he was 'fit' and 'prepared' to be President with that background, how is Mr. Trump any less fit or prepared for that office?)
I submit that the torrent of abuse and negativity currently being directed against Mr. Trump has a threefold purpose.
Those behind it are seeking to knock him 'off topic'; to force him to respond to their attacks, rather than continue to spread his own message to the voters.
They're trying to shore up their own base of voters, particularly those (like trades union members in 'rust belt' states) who may be drifting towards supporting Mr. Trump instead of the party for which they've reliably voted in previous elections.
They're trying to persuade undecided voters that Mr. Trump is too dangerous - too much of a 'loose cannon' - to warrant their support.
I suspect they're having some success in all three objectives; but I think they're also merely reinforcing the determination of many other voters to support Mr. Trump no matter what. It's a cliché that you'll know someone by his friends; but it's equally true that you'll know him by his enemies. Mr. Trump has united almost every progressive, liberal, left-wing constituency and individual in opposing him. People are recognizing that fact. A lot of voters appear to be thinking to themselves, "Hey, if he can piss off everyone who pisses me off, maybe he's worth supporting!"
The past 96 hours of media onslaught have evidenced what most of you already know, the ‘at risk’ financial interests of the UniParty are going hard against Donald Trump from every imaginable angle.
The timing is specific, the UniParty affiliates are trying to do the narrative damage before people become distracted with the Rio Olympic games.
. . .
The UniParty is fully aligned. It is no longer Democrats vs Republicans, it’s Globalists vs America-First Nationalists. President Obama, Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Tom Donohue, Mitch McConnell, the Koch Brothers, the Media, Wall Street, and the DNC are all aligned together, working hand-in-hand, toward a specific set of agenda items.
Candidate Donald Trump is the single existential threat to this carefully created UniParty construct they have spent billions to organize.
America’s party conventions ... highlighted a new political faultline: not between left and right, but between open and closed (see article). Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, summed up one side of this divide with his usual pithiness. “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo,” he declared. His anti-trade tirades were echoed by the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party.
America is not alone. Across Europe, the politicians with momentum are those who argue that the world is a nasty, threatening place, and that wise nations should build walls to keep it out ... Populist, authoritarian European parties of the right or left now enjoy nearly twice as much support as they did in 2000, and are in government or in a ruling coalition in nine countries.
. . .
... the question for pro-open types, who are found on both sides of the traditional left-right party divide, is how to win. The best approach will differ by country. In the Netherlands and Sweden, centrist parties have banded together to keep out nationalists. A similar alliance defeated the National Front’s Jean-Marie Le Pen in the run-off for France’s presidency in 2002, and may be needed again to beat his daughter in 2017. Britain may yet need a new party of the centre.
In America, where most is at stake, the answer must come from within the existing party structure. Republicans who are serious about resisting the anti-globalists should hold their noses and support Mrs Clinton. And Mrs Clinton herself, now that she has won the nomination, must champion openness clearly, rather than equivocating. Her choice of Tim Kaine, a Spanish-speaking globalist, as her running-mate is a good sign. But the polls are worryingly close. The future of the liberal world order depends on whether she succeeds.
Again, more at the link. It's worth reading the article in full to get a sense of how worried the global elite has become. Populism poses a deadly threat to their current domination of the international political and economic status quo - and they know it. That's why even a French President is weighing in on an American candidate for the US presidency. President Hollande knows that if a populist wins the presidency, globalists like himself will be on the ropes. He's terrified by the prospect. The US elections are none of his business; but since they may directly affect his own political survival, he's going to interfere in them, and damn the consequences.
Note the last sentence from the Economist above: "The future of the liberal world order depends on whether [Hillary Clinton] succeeds." That's precisely what's at stake here. The globalist, progressive, liberal powers that be understand this reality very clearly. That's why they're coordinating the current onslaught against Mr. Trump, and why they'll continue to do so from now until the election. They want to bury his prospects beneath a pile of steaming ordure so nauseating and repulsive (they hope) that no-one in their right minds will believe he's competent or qualified to be President, and therefore will not vote for him.
Remember the title to this article. The manure being spread by opponents of Mr. Trump is intended to persuade us not to support him . . . but it's also a telling sign that there really is a pony under there somewhere. It might be worth looking for it - precisely what the headline-writers and polemicists don't want us to do.
Fred Tomlinson, who has died aged 88, was the founder and leader of the Fred Tomlinson Singers, who provided vocals for Monty Python’s Flying Circus, The Two Ronnies and other television shows.
For some 20 years from the late 1960s Tomlinson’s singing, playing, arranging, compositional and even whistling skills were frequently called upon for musical items in television programmes.
Among other things he co-wrote the Python team’s Lumberjack Song (his singers played the Mounties in the original sketch and the Vikings singing Spam! Wonderful Spam! in another famous skit) and had a starring role as a soloist on The Two Ronnies in the St Botolph Country Dance Team’s rendition of Bold Sir John.
It was often left to Tomlinson to complete other people’s musical ideas. The comedians and script writers would come up with suggestions for a musical sketch and then say: “We’ll leave the rest to Fred.”
Science fiction author Tom Kratman (whom I had the pleasure of meeting for the first time at LibertyCon last month) brings the smackdown to the current election campaign in this article.
You know, I’m not quite ready to march in the streets shouting, “Viva Trump! Viva la Junta! Viva! Viva! Viva!” On the other hand, for many a year now I’ve wanted to dance along the yellow brick road with the munchkins while singing, “Ding dong; the wicked witch is dead.”
So I am against a woman being president, right? No, not really. I am against this woman being president. On the other hand, if we could get Margaret Thatcher’s body from the Brits, bring it to Louisiana, assemble as many Voodoo practitioners as we can and import some more from Haiti, resurrect Meg’s corpse and grant her natural citizenship I would happily vote for her. (What’s that? Born, reborn; what’s the difference? And besides, Democrats don’t object to the dead voting – provided, of course, that they vote Democrat – so they can hardly object to the dead running for office.) Sadly, that’s not our choice. Our choice is Hillary or Trump or a hopeless third party candidate, presumably Johnson and Stein.
But Hillary? Look, if Hitler and Hillary were on opposite sides on the same ballot, I’d have to say, “Well, I’m only a quarter Jewish; how bad could Hitler be?”
. . .
And there’s another thing; Trump is pissed – dare I say “royally pissed”? – at the DC establishment that wants his money but shuns him. There’s a better than fair chance, and a better chance than we’ve had since Reagan who, at the time, had bigger sturgeon to slice, for us to have someone in the White House who may actually purge the bureaucracy that’s taken over the country. Oh, no, he won’t do everything we need and stand the upper echelons of the Agency and State, EPA, Justice, etc., against a wall with the Old Guard providing the firing squads. But he’s fairly likely to trim them badly enough to put the fear of God – which is to say the fear of you and me; “Vox Populi, vox Dei!” – into the remaining swine.
And then there’s what I think is the most important thing, the answer to the question of why Trump is even running. To me, it’s obvious: He doesn’t need graft or girls; he wants a better place in the history books than the one he’s earned so far as “slumlord to the elite.” He wants to earn that better place. This will tend to make him controllable, to make him at least try to keep his campaign promises in a way we haven’t seen since Reagan and defeating the Soviet Union. I expect that wall on our Southern border to go up. I expect him to repudiate the globalist “Free trade” agreements that have allowed the world’s piratical and parasitic “elite” to loot us, Russia, Europe, everyone not of their little class. I expect some bureaucracy trimming. Why? Because he’s such a great guy? No, because he wants that place in the history books.
Conversely, I suspect Hillary intends to, and is sure she can, dictate what the history books will be allowed to say.
. . .
Here’s what I suggest: First, check the polls for your state carefully and conscientiously ... If it’s a very safe state for Hillary or a very safe Trump state, you can either stay home in more or less understandable disgust or you can go to the polls and vote for Johnson, Stein, Mickey Mouse, and I’ll say, “Onward, brothers and sisters!”7 Indeed, in that case, I’d encourage you to vote for Johnson. Why? To remind a President Trump that there are some things he needs to do and that he’s not as invulnerable as all that.
But what if it’s not a safe state for anyone? That’s tougher. I can tell you what I’m going to do; I’m going to cast an effective vote against Hillary by voting for Trump. You can let your conscience be your guide. Flip a coin if you like. Just remember that one side of that coin you flip says, “Hillary for President; Death of the Republic.”
I might add that LtCol. Kratman is (literally) putting his money where his mouth is.
I’d quite possibly make between five and ten thousand dollars this electoral season from my first published novel, A State of Disobedience, which outlines my expectations of what a Hillary Clinton presidency is going to be like and to lead to.
I always make extra money off that one during an electoral season and this season is really special. No, it’s not a huge amount but it’s not trivial to myself or most folks, either. It’s not, in my not so humble opinion, a great novel. It was my publisher’s idea, which he asked me to write up, and I do not play well with others. Still, if not great as a novel, it is kind of impressive for two things. One is the degree to which it drives lefties bonkers. Go read the one star reviews and you’ll see. The other is its prescience. Forget the date of 2063 on the cover, that was Jim Baen’s marketing ploy. In my mind, and by internal textual evidence, it was always set in and just after 2016.
Call it a gesture of both sincerity and the degree to which I think this election matters; I’m giving the book away from here on out as a free download. You can find it on Baen’s Free Library ... download the book, read it, encourage your friends to read it, and then contemplate just what name you want to mark down or in the voting booth.
I've read the book. It's good. I recommend it - particularly now that it's free to download. Try it. After all, what have you got to lose?
Here's another fascinating video from John Neeman Tools, whose video tutorial on the making of a longbow we saw last Sunday. Watch it in full-screen mode for best results.
I love watching old-school craftsmen at work. There's something timeless in the way they go about it.
A family in South Africa was involved in a traffic accident with a twist. It happened several years ago, but the report has only just come to my attention.
This family were overcome with emulsion after crashing their car - with 25 litres [about 6½ US gallons] of paint on the back seat.
The four occupants of a blue Fiat were left drenched in the white mixture after smashing into an oncoming Opel, which also appeared to be white.
It is believed the huge tub of paint was on the back seat and catapulted forward during the impact - covering the interior and its occupants.
Luckily, none of the occupants - two adults and two children - were injured after the smash in the KwaZulu-Natal province of South Africa.
There are all sorts of rumors that Erdogan may be contemplating declaring another Islamic Caliphate, this one based in Turkey (with himself at its head, of course). Purportedly, some Gulf states may bankroll such a development. It's even reported that a Turkish delegation may be in Pakistan, discussing the procurement of nuclear weapons to arm a future Caliphate.
Could it be that someone in Turkey is thinking about a few dozen nuclear warheads that are already on Turkish soil, and ripe for the taking? Are they perhaps considering that President Obama would do little or nothing to stop such a takeover, except scold the perpetrators?
We've heard from Karl Denninger many times in these pages. Now, in utter frustration at the abandonment of the rule of law in this country, he's laid it on the line about our desperately urgent need to turn aside from what he considers our currently disastrous path. It's a long interview, but well worth your time to listen to it in full.
I can't argue with anything he says. I can only hope that this election might - might - produce an Administration that will listen.
Last week I wrote an article titled 'In defense of larger handgun calibers'. It attracted a fair amount of attention, and 18 comments (so far). It also drew a few e-mails from readers, arguing for and against the points I made. Based on that discussion, I think some aspects of the subject deserve further attention.
The first is that in some parts of the country, magazine capacities are limited by law. In New York state (the most restrictive so far), they're technically restricted to seven rounds, although I'm informed that provision isn't being enforced at present. Nevertheless, according to that state's SAFE Act of 2013, even larger-capacity magazines are supposed to be loaded with only seven rounds. Colorado and New Jersey have 15-round magazine limits. Several other states and the District of Columbia enforce a ten-round magazine limit, although some (not all) permit owners of pre-ban larger-capacity magazines to retain (but not necessarily use) them.
Even without possible legal restrictions, smaller handguns frequently have a limited magazine capacity due solely to their size. For example, the Springfield XDS pistol in .45 ACP (my current choice for a large-caliber pocket carry pistol) holds 5 rounds in a standard magazine (probably the only practical choice for pocket carry), or 6 or 7 in an extended capacity magazine (plus one round in the chamber, of course). The 9mm. version of that pistol holds 7 rounds in a standard magazine, and 8 or 9 in an extended one.
Other smaller handguns and so-called 'pocket pistols' (e.g. the Glock models 42 and 43, Ruger LCP and LC9s, Smith & Wesson M&P Shield, etc.), and standard 1911-style pistols, are also limited to ten rounds or less in their magazines. Small revolvers (so-called 'snubnosed' models) are usually limited to 5 or 6 rounds.
Given such capacity limitations, one wants to use the most powerful round that one can control. Each round has to work harder than it would if one had the luxury of being able to fire a lot of them without worrying about reloading. In last week's article, I quoted Jim Higginbotham, whose rule of thumb about how many rounds it will take to stop an attacker is "2-3 hits with a .45, 4-6 with a .40, 5-8 with a 9mm". Based on my own (much more limited) experience, I have no hesitation in agreeing with him as a general rule (although, of course, a single accurately placed - or lucky - shot from even a 'mousegun' cartridge might stop a fight at once; however, one can't depend on that in the heat of the moment). Given limited magazine capacity, I therefore want the biggest, most powerful cartridge I can control in rapid, aimed, accurate fire. Under such circumstances, I'll choose .45 ACP over smaller alternatives, and .40 S&W if I can't have a .45. In a pocket pistol, I'll select a bullet that performs best out of a short barrel, and preferably one that isn't dependent upon expansion to do its job. (For example, in a .38 Special snubnosed revolver that's not +P rated, I prefer Buffalo Bore's hard-cast wadcutter round.)
I was initially reluctant to carry a .45 ACP pocket pistol, because when I tested some models (such as thesetwo) I found them very awkwardly shaped and hard-recoiling (to the point of being physically painful) and difficult to shoot accurately. However, when I tried the XDS, I found it much more ergonomic, comfortable and controllable. After putting over a hundred rounds downrange through it, I decided the heavier bullet weight and added momentum (discussed last week) of the larger round made it a worthwhile option. I still carry a small .380 ACP pocket pistol as a backup to a larger weapon, but I simply don't trust the smaller round to do an adequate job of personal defense. I also have a 9mm. version of the XDS, but out of a shorter barrel, any cartridge is limited in the energy it can generate, even in a +P or +P+ load. I therefore use it for training (9mm. ammo being a lot cheaper than .45), and carry the .45 for serious purposes.
(By the way: if you find a .45 pistol heavy in recoil and hard to control, there's a very simple 'cure' for the problem. Fire a few rounds of .44 Magnum - under trained supervision, of course. The much greater recoil, blast, flash and noise of the .44 will instantly make the .45 look tame by comparison! I've used that trick when teaching novices. Once they realize they can control a .44 Magnum round from a large revolver, and hit the target despite its seemingly overwhelming recoil, they become a lot more comfortable with the .45 ACP round.)
The final aspect is one I discussed last week, but would like to re-emphasize. It's the problem of defense against animals. If one habitually goes for walks along streets where dangerous dogs might be encountered, or in rural and semi-rural areas where other animals might pose a threat, it's advisable to carry a gun that can deal with their potential attacks. Last week I cited an incident where my friend Lawdog experienced less than optimal results with an otherwise-highly-rated 9mm. round. There are many accounts of attacks by dogs where smaller cartridges and calibers did not stop the attack quickly enough to avoid injury to the shooter and/or their own dog(s) and/or others in their company. That's another area where a heavier cartridge and/or larger caliber has real advantages. A .45 has often proven effective against big dogs, cougars, wolves, etc. A 9mm. or .357 Magnum round, even using a hollow-point bullet, has sometimes proven less effective against such threats.
So, there are three more factors for your consideration when selecting a defensive cartridge. As I said last week, I'm not knocking the defensive potential of cartridges like the 9mm. at all. I carry that round often, and trust my life to it. However, if magazine capacity is limited, and/or I can't use hollowpoint ammunition, and/or the threats with which I may have to deal are not necessarily on two legs, the bigger rounds do, I believe, have an advantage; so I'll use them for preference under those circumstances. IMHO, YMMV, and so on.
A man was so infuriated by the noise of “loud panting” coming from under the stairs at the entrance to his house that he called the cops at around 11pm, a police spokesperson said on Thursday.
Having searched the premises from top to bottom, the police finally discovered two very unusual suspects.
A pair of hedgehogs had been mating in the cosy little spot for about 20 minutes.
But, had they not been caught, the irate man would have been disturbed for a good while longer.
An expert from the veterinary department of Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich explained that the act normally “lasts several hours”.
But why were the animals making such a racket?
“Hedgehogs groan loudly during the act [...] and the male makes most of the noise”, the animal specialist added.
So that explains why the “suspicious sounds” were so excessively frustrating to the resident.
Luckily the aggravated man wasn’t disturbed for too long. The pair of hedgehogs fled immediately in the light of the policemen's torches.
